Split Requests

People swimming in 4-5 B70s even though the rule says "swimsuit"? People are doing this already. I heard quite a college teams had their swimmers don two suits. I also heard none of these times will be allowed, though. As far as swimming multiple events and requesting splits in all of them I don't really see the problem. If someone has to swim the same event 20 times, but finally sets a WR or something in the 20th swim it seems just as valid to me as if they did it the first time.

If USMS didn't have that rule, then I absolutely guarantee that there would be a bunch of fake relays entered at big meets like nationals. Enter a relay, but only show up with one swimmer going for an initial split. When no one dives in for legs 2-4, the relay is DQ'd, but the split time stands. This is a good USMS rule. If I were the ref in that situation... I'd DQ the one swimmer on the grounds of unsportsmanlike conduct. :-) -Rick

See, that's a sprinter's mentality. To me, if I swim a 1650 I maintain that I am swimming a 50 and a 100, and a 200, etc. By swimming the event called "50 freestyle" you guys are just neglecting an opportunity to swim multiple events all in one fell swoop! What?! If you are swimming a 1650, you are NOT swimming a 50. You are merely traveling very slowly and breathing a lot. I'll have to neglect fewer "opportunities" in the future. I may look at meet entry forms differently from now on. (Oh, yes, the 100 back and 50 fly are back to back again -- just like they are at NEs this weekend --no problem, I'll swim the 200 back. Unless that's right next to the 100 fly. Must be time to charge Chris for a fly-back rant.)

As for freestylers getting more splits, yes, sigh, freestylers have more opportunities. But it is just like percentage-based tax cuts - if you earn $100k, yes, your 1% tax cut is going to be greater in $ that someone who is getting a 1% tax cut on their $40k. There are more freestyle events, so more opportunities. But if USMS added 400s of the strokes and an 800 IM, I'm not entirely confident that the same people swimming these will be going after any 50 fly records. I really don't think it is unfair if all of you have access to the same thing. In this case, it is good practice to notify your neighbors of your intentions. People like to race their neighbors. Especially in a distance event (let's say the 1000 free), if your neighbor is going after the first 200 and sprinting his *** off, you'll die like a pig if you try to keep up with them on the first part of your race when you've got 80% of your race to go with no gas in the tank. Plus, there are further benefits to those swimming the prescribed race. Hypothetical example - Paul Smith's 1000 at nationals, with me in the lane next to him (I didn't swim that event). Paul goes out like a bat out of hell in the first 100, gets his :46.whatever national record, the loafs it home the rest of the way. I swim my swim and finish 3 seconds ahead of him. "oh, well he didn't even try for 90% of the race" say the naysayers. my response: "yes, but the clock does not lie - my time is faster. I beat Paul Smith." :banana: (For the record, my 1000 from zones three weeks prior was 5 and change seconds faster than Paul's nationals time, but I am fully aware that I'd get lapped in a head to head 1000). I make it a practice to always tell the starter and the swimmers in my heet if I'm going for a split time and it has always been annunced to the field prior to stepping onto the blocks. Peg...don't I owe you a beer for your beating my time?

our meet directors must be very nice in sweden. we don't have to request lead off time splits for relays to count, they automatically get counted in our time database. at my last meet I swam 50/100/200 ***, 100/200/400 IM , 200 back and 400 free. I was suppose to swim the 1500 but was not 100% so scratched. either way, since I didn't qualify for the 200free but was going to be on our relay I requested the lead off just so I could know myself what I could swim. to my surprise when I looked on line my time was registered. then I checked back to the begining of the year and my 50 back in the relay was also registered. it was only .02s faster than my individual time, but still faster :-)

What about the clear water issue in all of this? Is it fair to the guy or gal who fought his or her way to the front of a pack of 8 churning, thrashing sprinters to a record 50 time while split guy or gal has nice un-churned, un-thrashed water to play with? Isn't sandbagging to get clear water frowned upon? Why then is it sanctioned, or at least ignored, with recognized splits?

One of the interesting things is that the USMS relay initial split rule is in tension with the FINA rule. Compare: FINA SW 11.5 In the case of a relay disqualification, legal splits up to the time of the disqualification shall be recorded in the official results. with USMS 103.13.1 An official time shall be achieved in a USMS-sanctioned competition or -recognized event in accordance with all applicable rules. It may be achieved in: C A relay leadoff leg provided the swimmers complete the event without being disqualified. Even though you might not agree per se with the split rules, I don't see how you would get around them. FINA dictates the procedure for the world records and world Top 10's, and it would be somewhat silly to create a national procedure that is completely contrary to that (oh wait, that darn yards thing....). I like having the opportunity to get an initial split for my own purposes because sometimes, for whatever reason, you don't always get a chance to swim a particular event. For example, I was at a meet in April doing the 1650, so I asked for the 1000 split too. Sure there may be inequities in the competition with initial splits, but what stops someone from setting up a time trial, or sanctioned intrasquad meet, or something like that where the deck is loaded in their favor? Patrick King

People are doing this already. I heard quite a college teams had their swimmers don two suits. I also heard none of these times will be allowed, though. As far as swimming multiple events and requesting splits in all of them I don't really see the problem. If someone has to swim the same event 20 times, but finally sets a WR or something in the 20th swim it seems just as valid to me as if they did it the first time. Yeah, I get that it's legal. I'm just not crazy about it. But I guess it's a way to work the order of events if you don't like it, without being called a dirty sandbagger. Although it seems just as "selfish" to the people in your heat, perhaps, as some say sandbaggers are ... Plus, it seems to disadvantage flyers and breaststrokers somewhat. Freestylers can just get more splits in more events. The multi-B70 time won't count, Kirk, even though technically it's still legal?

Its totally legal. I believe it's good practise to let the officials know if you're trying for a record. Here in the UK, a guy swimming in the Nationals in October got a WR on his 100m free (50.08). The next day he swam the 200 free and obviously went for the record again on the first 100. He swam 49.97 - which is now classed as the new WR. He finished the race in 2.29.00 in last place!:D

Well, I think this rule sucks then, violates the spirit of fair play, and should be re-written to prohibit such conduct. Let's be pro-swimmer in the interpretation of rules, but this seems extreme and more toward the "playing" and cheating end of things. What will we have next? People swimming in 4-5 B70s even though the rule says "swimsuit"? Fort, What, in your mind is fair play, and what constitutes a pro-swimmer rule? Personally, as I interpret these two terms, I think you have your sandbags in the wrong place, as I think this rule is incredibly pro-swimmer. It gives all swimmers absolutely every opportunity to achieve a record and/or top 10 time within the confines of the schedule of a meet. Mostly everyone knows about it, a few meet entry forms have alluded to this rule, and in fact, some meet directors have gone so far as to include the split request forms in their meet program (you may see this again locally soon).